I fully support TV coverage of the Board of County Commission meetings. I believe the county does a good job notifying citizens of all county meetings through our website, email notification lists, Channel 20 and newspaper advertising.

As noted in the Stuart News editorial on February 11, 2011, millions of tax dollars are being spent in Martin County without any public discussion or review. The consent agenda is intended only for “routine items.” It is not to be used to conceal unplanned and wasteful spending. I would put a stop to this abuse.

I absolutely support continued live TV coverage and reruns of the Board of County Commissioner meetings. I support coverage of boards and committees, in particular the Local Planning Agency and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) meetings.

I support live coverage of BOCC meetings as well as all meetings where decisions are made or policies are formed or even discussed. Other than encouraging the public to access the coverage of these meetings I can see nothing else that can be done to get more people to become involved in their government.

Code enforcement does a good job working with both resident and absentee property owners. Both resident and non-resident property owners must meet the same code enforcement guidelines. The county may want to consider increasing the amount of the fines in the case where there are multiple violations over time or where violations are not addressed by the property owner in a timely manner.

First, we need adequate staff for code enforcement. Second, the county legal staff should be directed to impose and enforce liens on the derelict properties in foreclosure that have a negative impact on neighborhoods.

I have always been a proponent of keeping our rural areas rural and have a strong belief that we must support and keep agriculture strong in our community. That said, rural land use doesn’t mean that rural land owners should have no rights to develop their property or that the only option for development should be 20-acre ranchettes, a development pattern that has been shown to be environmentally detrimental. I firmly believe in coming up with solutions that lead to the preservation of environmentally significant land and the continuation of agricultural uses.

Our agricultural lands are important for food supply and for water recharge. We must not extend development into the agricultural area while we have enough vacant commercial and industrial space for development inside the urban boundary of the coastal area and Indiantown. We should not extend or breach the boundary until there is a demonstrated need to do so.

In 2010, my opponent approved a land use change on agricultural farmland on 1700 acres west of I-95 in Palm City, far outside the urban boundary. The new land use that he voted for allows 6 million square feet of industrial and commercial uses. This property does not have water and sewer access. When this is developed, it will have major impacts to County Road 714 and to Palm City.

I believe that we have appropriate regulations in place within the county's Comprehensive Plan to address these matters. Martin County has established Urban Service Boundaries inside which dense development can occur in order to provide reasonable public services at reasonable costs. When we "build out" these areas we can consider our next steps. At this time we have an acceptable inventory of empty residences and commercial spaces or areas inside the USBs upon which either can be built on.

The Sunshine law and its goal of open and transparent government is the law and I respect and revere the Rule of Law. Strict adherence to the Sunshine helps keep government accountable and honest. Representative government means that the governed have a right and an obligation to know what their government is doing.

My opponent, Mr. Hayes, is on record advocating that the Sunshine law not apply to all government committees and boards.

Yes I think these laws are crucial to open government and I am in full support of the public being informed about what is going into decisions that are being made. As citizens of this country, state and county we have the right of knowing what is going on within the bodies that govern us and thus determine how we are able to live our lives.

I was recently honored to be the recipient of a national Blue-Green Heroes award for my work on water and river issues. I have always been a champion of water and river issues and have spent countless hours testifying at both the South Florida Water Management District and in Tallahassee on behalf of clean water. I would like to see more of our citizens involved with these issues at the District and in Tallahassee.

The River Coalition’s goals of protecting and improving the Indian River Lagoon and St. Lucie Estuary are critically important, as are the efforts to ensure sufficient water supply for all our rivers. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) is our best hope for stopping the massive discharges. I will work with groups like the Rivers Coalition and with fellow-Commissioners like Sarah Heard and Ed Fielding to lobby Congress for funding that will help stop the massive discharges. Martin County residents voted for the Healthy Rivers Referendum, and we need the state and federal governments to live up to their responsibilities.

No. As set out on my website www.AnneScott2012.com, the campaign will not knowingly accept contributions from any person or business that stands to gain financially from County Commissioner's decisions.

I don’t support automatic rate increases. In 2009 the Martin County Commission approved automatic annual rate increases of up to 2.5% based on an index set by the Florida Public Service Commission. Rates were increased 2.5% for 2011, and .5% for 2012.
I believe the County Commission should have to justify all rate increases.

Martin County staff positions (that are not in Fire Rescue), have been reduced greatly from 601 in 2008 to 501 in 2012. Employees should be fairly paid for their fine work and a combination of performance pay and a small cost of living increase is likely the best approach. When the job criteria are clear, I believe the county employees are most likely to perform the best.

I believe I am the best candidate to represent the diverse group of citizens in my District and the County as a whole. To continue my work over the last four years to protect the character and nature of Martin County while building our economic and business infrastructure. Also, to guide our county through this unprecedented economically challenging time while continuing to provide outstanding services with minimal, if any, increase in revenues.

I am running because I am deeply concerned about the future of the county under the control of my opponent and his Commission majority. Approving projects for the benefit of the land speculation fraternity means higher taxes for the rest of us and threatens our quality of life. Am I against growth? Certainly not, but I know that how and where we grow affects how our community looks and feels, and it greatly affects our taxes. Growth requires additional infrastructure to maintain our level of service. We have plenty of room to grow inside the urban boundary, and that is where we can grow most efficiently and economically.

We must restore conservative fiscal planning and stop wasting tax dollars on infrastructure for development in the rural areas, such as the Citrus Blvd extension. Spending half of our special sales tax park revenue on the Sailfish Splash waterpark at the expense of other parks and ball fields was an unfair mistake I would not have supported. I am concerned that the taxpayers will eventually have to subsidize maintenance of this facility when, inevitably, the novelty wears off.

The chief executive for the County Commission is the County Administrator. The Commission has direct authority to hire and oversee two County employees only, namely the County Administrator and the County Attorney. The chief executive reports directly to the County Commission. The mandates of the current commission majority are not representative of the will of the majority of Martin County residents.

Mobile home communities are a valuable asset as part of our home inventories and serve a much-needed purpose for lower income seniors and families. We should encourage mobile home park owners to improve and beautify their developments and keep them as a vital part of our community.

Florida has long recognized well-kept mobile home communities as a source of affordable housing. Martin County has many excellent, well-maintained mobile home communities that demonstrate this success and the ability to withstand hurricanes. It has been a deep concern of mine when such communities are allowed to deteriorate because the underlying landowners want to make a bigger profit on a different type of housing.

In the 3-1/2 years that I have been in office, we have cut budgets in every department, reduced staff and generally shrunk our activities in response to declining revenues. There are more areas to look at in the future, such as benefits. However, as the cost of goods and services rises, we must eventually either raise more revenues or suffer a significant decline in services.

My opponent and the current Commission Majority have put us into a budget hole and they have continued this pattern with long-term contracts that are not in the best interest of taxpayers.

I'm concerned about the use of county taxes that fund the Business Development Board (BDB). My opponent doubled their funding from $325,000 to $650,000 annually with a built in increase of 3% per year. The BDB funding comes from occupational license fees which would otherwise go into the general fund. Even though the BDB receives about 90% of their funding from the county, until a recent lawsuit, the Commission allowed this board to operate without following Sunshine laws and without any public input in closed meetings. The BDB has not helped existing small businesses, rather they use taxpayer money to represent development interests.

Meanwhile, parks, libraries, road maintenance and other county services have had their budgets slashed. The public relies on the county to provide essential services that have the most direct impact on the residents. The services such as libraries, ballfields and code enforcement have taken a big hit already and we should not cut these services any more.

We still have some belt-tightening and service reductions to exercise, however, we are quickly approaching the point where greater service reductions will touch more of our residents and eventually there will be a call for a remedy.

I believe the County Commission should play a very active role in both attracting new businesses to the county and in ensuring that our current business community is well served. Diversifying our economy and adding new tax-paying businesses is a way to avoid the need for higher taxes or drastic service cuts.

The role of the Martin County Commission in retaining and/or attracting businesses to the area should be governmental. The first priority should be focusing on the expansion and support of all sectors of our existing business base.

The County Commission should firmly resolve that the Comprehensive Plan will be applied consistently, equally and fairly in all matters. No exceptions. The process for compliance and approval should be streamlined. The process for seeking exceptions or changes to the Comprehensive Plan should be arduous and daunting.

As a start the County should address the permitting process. There is a widespread and mostly accurate notion that it is just too difficult to get anything done in Martin County. It is unnecessarily long and frustrating for small businesses that want to expand or home owners who want to renovate to obtain permitting. The Commission should direct staff to make the permitting process more user friendly. They should cultivate an atmosphere and attitude of assistance not obstruction.

This will not require additional staff. On the contrary, if the County Commission spent less time and money on pipe dreams and promises and formulating and defending policies antithetical to the will of the majority of residents, it would free up staff and allow them to deliver a more streamlined, efficient and effective government.

Before approving any new development I would ask:
1) Does it comply with our rules and laws?
2) Does it conform to existing land use and zoning?
3) How will its impacts be paid for?

All new developments, be they residential or commercial must comply with our Comprehensive Plan and land regulations. Assertions that The Comprehensive Plan is outdated are false. State law requires that the plan be updated based on new population numbers every 5 years, and the Comp Plan has been updated with new population numbers and land development data.

No. If what we want Martin County to be is an “average” community with lower levels of service, then a Tax Protection Act would be something to consider. However, Martin County is anything but average and our citizens expect high quality services.

New development must pay appropriate impact fees and pay for all its infrastructure costs. The new taxes generated by new development pays for the rest. The new tax revenues generated by new development here in Martin County appear to be doing just fine in covering the cost of growth.

Despite developers repeated promises, development never pays the full cost of growth. Impact fees are a fair and enforceable way to ensure that new development pays a portion of the cost for needed infrastructure. Studies show that even with fairly high impact fees, new growth only pays about 40% of the cost of the infrastructure needed and an even smaller percentage of the ongoing operation and maintenance of that infrastructure.

Martin County’s Comprehensive Plan requires that “Future development shall pay for the full cost of the capital improvements needed to address the impact of such development.”

Unfortunately for us taxpayers, the current Commission majority doesn’t believe in impact fees. All but road impact fees were completely suspended for approximately 1.5 years, and my opponent has repeatedly voted to reduce impact fees. Waiving impact fees does not waive impacts. They will occur no matter what so waiving impact fees really means transferring the financial impact of growth to the taxpayers.

The key to better road construction is a solid contract with enforceable provisions. As a former attorney and judge, I understand contract law, and as a commissioner, I will do my best to make sure the county’s interests are protected in all construction contracts.

Our current system of three minutes at the beginning and end of meetings is an appropriate amount of time. Our citizens also have excellent opportunities for access to staff and commissioners outside of public meetings.

I believe that citizens should be assured an opportunity to address significant issues and decisions before the commissioners have made up their minds.
How long? It appears that 3 minutes is a reasonable time limit for members of the public to speak. I would reinstate the custom of allowing a citizen to address a specific issue both at 9:05 or again at the time the item is called on the agenda..

I think it was an abuse of its rules for the Commission to allow Marcel Mullet's mother an unlimited time to speak on behalf of the Extreme Waterpark at the May 8th Commission meeting. Under current commission rules, only a development project's applicant and their designated agent are permitted additional time to present their case for a project.

User fees for non-residents is generally a good idea provided the details (enforcement, monitoring, method of collection) can be worked out so that the cost of administration doesn’t offset the gain the county would receive from the fees.

State law prohibits the County from charging non residents for using our beaches. However we are allowed and we do charge non residents a fee to use our libraries. I support these fees, because the cost of building the libraries, parks and boat ramps was paid for by Martin County tax payers.

The contracts resulting from some of the union negotiations were not really affordable in this economy. It may be advisable to use a professional negotiator when public funds are involved and the contract under negotiation is fraught with political overtones.

I’m more concerned about where we grow, how much that growth costs, and who pays for the costs of new growth. Growth requires additional infrastructure: roads, utilities and other facilities that must be built so that new growth does not impact the current residents with more traffic and fewer services. We still have plenty of room for growth inside the Urban Service Boundary, including Indiantown, and that's where we should grow because that is where we can extend our infrastructure in the most efficient and economical way.

Since the cost of growth is not covered in full by the development's impact fees, the taxpayers are left to pay the remainder. Impact fees are essential to pay for the cost of growth. Mr. Hayes eliminated impact fees for approximately 1.5 years, except for the road fees that were required by their bonding rules. Then Hayes voted against re-instating them. If the developer doesn't pay, for the cost of growth, who will? I think we all know the answer - the current taxpayers. In actuality, fees that are "waived" for the developers do not go away, instead they are redistributed to the taxpayers to pay.

In our economy, most businesses have taken a hit and employees share the impacts. Likewise, I am concerned whether the compensation packages for the over the $100,000 group has been appropriately reviewed.

Unquestionably, there are areas throughout the county where sidewalks are needed. Sidewalks can be funded through grants, ad valorem taxes and Community Redevelopment Tax Increment Funds as appropriate.

Most of our newer developments have sidewalks. Some of our older neighborhoods were built before we required sidewalks. I understand that the commission majority voted to use sidewalk impact fees for economic development. I don’t think that is appropriate or legal.

There are a great number of capital improvements in our plan, along with a wide variety of funding sources that are as varied as the projects, so it is difficult to rank the projects one against another.

I’m very concerned about the current lack of funding for road maintenance and resurfacing. All of our road impact fees are being used to pay off the bonds that funded Citrus Blvd. and Green River Parkway. Before we build any more new roads we need to assure adequate funding for maintaining existing roads.

We need to build more ball fields, and the county cannot continue to ignore the the cost of maintaining existing ball fields.

I would direct Human Resources to perform an analysis of vacation and sick leave plans in nearby Florida counties and counties of our size. I would like to see alternatives presented to the Board.

My understanding is that the county no longer has separate sick and vacation time accruals. The employees accrue time off into one category called Paid Time Off (PTO). I think there is an advantage to returning to the policy of separation of sick time and vacation time. The sick time could be accumulated without restriction, so that employees would have a bank to use in case of illness. However, the policy of payout needs to be reviewed, so there is a balance between an incentive for employees not to overuse their sick time vs large payouts at the end of employment. For vacation time, employees would only be allowed to hold over a limited number of days to subsequent years, based on analysis of typical policies of other government entities. This would encourage employees to take their vacation time.

I do not support allowing clustered development on Agricultural land in western Martin County. The County Commission would not be able to stop these developments from incorporating. Once incorporated, Martin County could not limit density increases, because we would not have jurisdiction over them.

Protect the character and nature of Martin County while building our economic and business infrastructure. Also, guiding our county through this unprecedented economically challenging time while continuing to provide outstanding services with minimal, if any, increase in revenues.

Restoring good governance to Martin County including responsible fiscal decision making is our most important mission. The only way we can keep taxes down is by cutting the wasteful spending that has been the hallmark of the current commission majority. Our elected officials and staff should conduct themselves in a civil atmosphere and the citizens of Martin County should insist on a government that is fair, objective and trustworthy.

Unanswered questions

We did not receive any responses to these questions.

Q36. Please give an example of how you have supported the Sunshine or public records laws